Effect of antihypertensive drug treatment on long-term blood pressure reduction: An individual patient-level data meta-analysis of 352,744 Participants from 51 large-scale randomised clinical trials
Canoy, D.; Copland, E.; Nazarzadeh, M.; Ramakrishnan, R.; Pinho-Gomes, A.-C.; Salam, A.; Dwyer, J.; Farzadfar, F.; Sundstrom, J.; Woodward, M.; Davis, B. R.; Rahimi, K.
Show abstract
ObjectivesEvidence from randomised trials on long-term blood pressure (BP) reduction from pharmacologic treatment is limited. To investigate the effects of antihypertensive drugs on long-term BP change and examine its variation over time and among people with different clinical characteristics DesignIndividual participant-level data meta-analysis Setting and data sourceThe Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists Collaboration involving 51 large-scale long-term randomised clinical trials Participants352,744 people (42% women) with mean age of 65 years and mean baseline systolic/diastolic BP of 152/87 mmHg, of whom 18% were current smokers, 50% had cardiovascular disease, 29% had diabetes, and 72% were taking antihypertensive treatment at baseline InterventionPharmacological BP-lowering treatment OutcomeDifference in longitudinal changes in systolic and diastolic BP between randomised treatment arms over an average follow-up of four years ResultDrugs were effective in lowering BP, with the maximum effect becoming apparent after 12-month follow-up and with gradual attenuation towards later years. Based on measures taken [≥]12 months post-randomisation, more intense BP-lowering treatment reduced systolic/diastolic BP (95% confidence interval) by -11.2 (-11.4 to -11.0)/-5.6 (-5.8 to -5.5) mmHg than less intense treatment; active treatment by -5.1 (-5.3 to -5.0)/-2.3 (-2.4 to -2.2) mmHg lower than placebo, and active arm by -1.4 (-1.5 to -1.3)/-0.6 (-0.7 to -0.6) mmHg lower than the control arm for drug class comparison trials. BP reductions were consistently observed across a wide range of baseline BP values and ages, and by sex, history of cardiovascular disease and diabetes, and prior antihypertensive treatment use. ConclusionPharmacological agents were effective in lowering long-term BP among individuals with a wide range of characteristics, but the net between-group reductions were modest, which is partly attributable to the intended trial goals.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Cost-effectiveness of leveraging existing HIV primary health systems and community health workers for hypertension screening and treatment in Africa: an individual-based modelling study 92%
- Genetically-proxied therapeutic inhibition of antihypertensive drug targets and risk of common cancers 91%
- Differential impact of Covid-19 on incidence of diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases in acute, post-acute and long Covid-19: population-based cohort study in the United Kingdom 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Projected Impact of Nonpharmacologic Management of Stage 1 Hypertension Among Lower-Risk US Adults 95%
- Derivation of an Outcome-Driven Threshold for Aortic Pulse Wave Velocity: An Individual-Participant Meta-Analysis 94%
- Hypertension Management Dynamics in Pediatric CKD: Insights from the 4C Study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparative Effectiveness of Second-line Antihyperglycemic Agents for Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Large-scale, Multinational, Federated Analysis of the LEGEND-T2DM Study 95%
- Lipid-Modulating Agents for Prevention or Treatment of COVID-19 in Randomized Trials 91%
- The Genetic Determinants of Aortic Distension 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- A multi-ethnic polygenic risk score is associated with hypertension prevalence and progression throughout adulthood 93%
- Within-family studies for Mendelian randomization: avoiding dynastic, assortative mating, and population stratification biases 91%
- Biomarker panels for improved risk prediction and enhanced biological insights in patients with atrial fibrillation 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.